Options
Based on the pics, you see any reasons why this 1894 Morgan is not a MS65? (Not mine, nor do I know
ER
Posts: 7,345 ✭
Man, this is tight grading. This is in a new holder, too, not your OGH. Ya think the grader(s) were thinking, "We're not gonna make you rich."? (Note the price jump from 64 to 65)
0
Comments
<< <i>Man, this is tight grading. This is in a new holder, too, not your OGH. Ya think the grader(s) were thinking, "We're not gonna make you rich."? (Note the price jump from 64 to 65) >>
I think you hit the nail on the head. Sure is the nicest 64 I've seen in a current holder... Now imagine if it were in a 65 holder (or 66) and the carbon spot on the reverse started spreading like a cancer... Future buyback?
Check out my current listings: https://ebay.com/sch/khunt/m.html?_ipg=200&_sop=12&_rdc=1
I've been told I tolerate fools poorly...that may explain things if I have a problem with you. Current ebay items - Nothing at the moment
btw ER.....I doubt that is Eric (too obvious )....besides Eric has been reborn or at Thiggy's place
I've been told I tolerate fools poorly...that may explain things if I have a problem with you. Current ebay items - Nothing at the moment
<< <i>Ah ha! Good bring up!
btw ER.....I doubt that is Eric (too obvious )....besides Eric has been reborn or at Thiggy's place >>
The Devil man wa banned for improper behavior--and should stay banned IMO.
NSDR - Life Member
SSDC - Life Member
ANA - Pay As I Go Member
<< <i>
<< <i>Ah ha! Good bring up!
btw ER.....I doubt that is Eric (too obvious )....besides Eric has been reborn or at Thiggy's place >>
The Devil man wa banned for improper behavior--and should stay banned IMO. >>
blah blah blah....you should be banned for stupidity, too bad you haven't been
I've been told I tolerate fools poorly...that may explain things if I have a problem with you. Current ebay items - Nothing at the moment
Knowledge is the enemy of fear
Don't know him. Regardless, rest assured I am not Eric, but just a humble collector who finds himself stumbling with learning to take coin images and remembers coming across the aforementioned link
Sunnywood
Sunnywood's Rainbow-Toned Morgans (Retired)
Sunnywood's Barber Quarters (Retired)
As stated before, with the price increase from 64-65 it would've been resubmitted MANY times if people thought it was really a 65. The images do the coin considerably better than it really is, if you zoom in you can start to see some hairlines.
-Daniel
-Aristotle
Dum loquimur fugerit invida aetas. Carpe diem quam minimum credula postero.
-Horace
last one sold for 9+change.
-- Adam Duritz, of Counting Crows
My Ebay Auctions
MY COINS FOR SALE AT https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/collectors-showcase/other/bajjerfans-coins-sale/3876
Hit the nail on the head. It has been tried or there is some limiting factor not apparent in the photo. The new fangled pictures at Heritage make everything look "gem"..... if it was "gem", I certainly would think Mr. Crackout would have cracked!
But yes, mark-wise it looks like an MS-67 and if it were a more common date, it would have gotten at least an MS-65.
The trouble is were that is a BIG price jump for ONE grading point, the services often get conservative. In the this case Gray Sheet bid in MS-64 is $9,250.00. In MS-65 it jumps to $34,000. If the coin for the reasons that I mentioned would not market well at the MS-65 price level, it could come back to be a problem for PCGS. Therefore you see the lower grade.
<< <i>(Note the price jump from 64 to 65) >>
You just answered your own question.
Oh, and the very useful thread accredited to Eric Tillery concerning the use of diffused light, reminds me that I miss him on this forum. He brought a lot of expertise and some awsome pic's to this place IMHO.
Best wishes,
Pete
Louis Armstrong
<< <i>Some have mentioned the jump in price between a MS64 and a MS65. Should that even be a consideration when grading a coin? Shouldn't it be judged on it's own merits and the value be damned? >>
Should it be a consideration? Absolutely not. But given that these are businesses offering some guarantees on their coins? It's inevitable.
TPGs -- at least the ones which stand behind their grades with guarantees -- have a conflict of interest when it comes to giving condition rarities the grades they deserve.
<< <i>Is this sort of photography beneficial to sellers? I'm just starting out taking coin pics, but I've been operating under the assumption that the idea is to show the coin as it really is, because if I was buying it, I'd want the best look at it I could get beforehand. Pictures like this, if they actually sell coins, seem to shoot that theory out of the water. What do you think? >>
A very astute observation. I agree. Photography should try and give the most accurate depiction of what the coin looks like in hand, and Heritage's images no longer do that, which is very disappointing for anyone trying to discriminate between coins.
1) Ms. Liberty has a nick on her cheek and something going on underneath her eye.
2) At the very tip of the bottom of her neck, there's a nick.
3) There's another nick over her eye.
4) On the reverse, there's some raised metal between the eagle's neck and the left (the eagle's left) wing.
5) The eagle's legs are lacking in detail, as are the eagle's tail feathers above where the branch and the arrow intersect. I can't tell if that's wear or a weak strike, but it's not good.
I made all these comparisons using a coin that ANACS graded MS-64 (and actually, I think ANACS might have been generous with my coin, because when the light reflects off of it, you can see some smoothness above the ear.)
-- Adam Duritz, of Counting Crows
My Ebay Auctions
The only consideration I think is that a TPG would want to be sure that the coin is solid for the grade when big dollars are involved. While PCGS might be the sole arbiter on a grading submission, if the owner of the coin decides to drag it into court things could get dicey and pricey.
MY COINS FOR SALE AT https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/collectors-showcase/other/bajjerfans-coins-sale/3876
<< Some have mentioned the jump in price between a MS64 and a MS65. Should that even be a consideration when grading a coin? Shouldn't it be judged on it's own merits and the value be damned? >>
I see "down grading" or conservative grading all the time for this reason. It's very much a part of the market, which translates from TPG practices. It's one of the reasons why type collectors get hosed when it comes to forming type sets. A prime example is the $10 Indian gold piece. The 1926 and 1932 coins, which are the most common dates, get overgraded almost as a matter of course. That's why the smart type collector buys a common date in the 1909 to 1914 era to get properly graded coin. It costs a little more, but the results are worth it for the true collector who wants a properly graded coin.
<< <i>A prime example is the $10 Indian gold piece. The 1926 and 1932 coins, which are the most common dates, get overgraded almost as a matter of course. >>
I'd love to get a certified AU-58 1932 Eagle for my type set, largely because there are so few of them because 99.9% of them are mint state. I've never seen one, though.
MY COINS FOR SALE AT https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/collectors-showcase/other/bajjerfans-coins-sale/3876
<< <i>Did not meet reserve, did not sell. You think maybe something's wrong with it? >>
Only someone who saw the coin in person might be able to shed some light on this.